# 224: Border Thinking
Story behind the Passage
What occupies my in mind today is very simple and complex at the same time — as always when I start thinking about something. There is the simple question of borders and if they can be overcome. “For sure,” you might say now, “we do it all the time.” Every time we open a Zoom call, we transcend physical borders. But, hey, turn on the news: The conflict in Israel: Is it about borders — for sure! And so are close to 100% of all other international conflicts, even if borders might not be the primary reason of the argument which is made explicit. At some point, borders always enter the dialogue, even in the case of seemingly borderless terrorism. Eventually, borders come in when the phrase “all parties involved” is uttered. If there are different parties, there must be a border between them, right?
Certainly, all this will sound very familiar to students of the humanities who are thinking about this stuff all the time, especially in Postcolonial Studies, which is actually the title of the book that I have picked for today. I went into Postcolonial Studies when writing about Orientalism in my PhD. But I have never become a big fan of it because I was always hit by the difference between the postcolonial world as it might be envisioned thereotically and the political practice out there. Transnationalism is a bit less power-centric and “neutral” if you want so, which is why I tend to look for answers there right now. Still, since I wanted to address borders today, Postcolonialism is a good entry point.
When I say border today in connection with my thoughts, there is a simple question I have that has nothing to do with the physical and not even with the mental or political borders per se. Hence, it is not so much a normative issue but a cognitive one. I am asking myself: Are we even able to think without borders? How could we ever grasp and structure the world without rationally drawing borders around concepts? Yes, linguists and computer scientists have been thinking about that for a long time as well, I guess, and people in other fields too. Since I cannot keep track of all the knowledge in all these fields, I will have to simply focus on what I am thinking right now — that is all I can do.
My Learnings
“While national borders may no longer impede international trade and global economic transactions, they do nonetheless matter greatly when it comes to human subjects whose movements are carefully regulated.” Again, as mentioned above, I care about the kind of movement that our brains inhibit. Can we really think without borders? And connected to this issue is the question: Can we really think without binaries? This is really what is behind this. Based on what I researched in the past, the answer was always “no.” People think in binaries because it is easier for our brains. Every thing is defined by its opposite, we know that and we see it confirmed all the time. So, you might ask, why raise this issue again? There would have to be something really new and unexpected if that were to change, right?
And that is the thing: Is it really possible that digital technology can affect our brains in a way that we operate in quantum mode? What I mean by that is that we are capable of seeing everything in-between the numbers 0 and 1; that we truly grasp and incorporate the finding that light can be wave and particle at the same time. Is it really possible to be living in such a floating world in which (conceptual) borders do not stop us from drifting off? Yes, we are seeing this in all the instances that the author describes above. Financial and economic transactions are everyday-examples of this. Are we used to this? Sure. So, why not get used to the fact that no borders exist anymore?
I think, it can come to this point where our brains unlearn more border thinking but there is one ultimate limit (at least for the majority of humanity): The physical border between you and the other. I know, this sounds very spooky now but I have to say it. If you believe in the fact that borders can disappear completely, that we do not need them to have a ‘better’ world, this also means that you lose this thought of you being different from anything around you, from anybody else. And this is, of course, a crucial element of all kinds of religions, of reaching the point of total transcendence. The question is: Is it realistic? And what does this have to do with artificial intelligence?
You know, when I really got into meditation, my teacher told me that reaching the deep level of meditation in which you enter the stage of consciousness is similar to the experience you have when taking drugs. In other words: There is a shortcut to getting there but it does not last, of course. If we assume that we as human beings can indeed get there, the question really is if computers cannot get there faster. If we are about to lose our sense of corporeality, our belief that our body is different from a tree or a computer, than we are the computer.
Is that spooky? Is it insane?
Maybe.
But I am just thinking out loud, right?
I do not actually think this will happen but what really got me started today was the insight that we still have a long way to go before being able to solve the global problems we are facing under the label of “sustainability.” There is a tacit axiom hidden in this that we all know why we should take action. And sicence cannot do the trick of convincing us, I guess. Because we would have to understand that a problem in China or the Northpole really poses a threat to us. But we do not do so, unless, like Covid, a problem immediately affects us. Then we get scared because we immediately experience the borderless world. So, in order to really make us act, we need to be aware that the problems of others are our problems — whether we see them or not, whether they have to transgress a physical border or not.
I do not think that either Postcolonialism nor Transnationalism offer great answers to this. For talking about this, we need the philosophy of technology on board. That is actually what I would like to see happen. I have no idea still how our society could ever come to a point where knowledge is so fragmented and separated that we have lost track of thinking about the basic influences of other fields of knowledge on our own. I am not even talking about details, I am still talking about the basics. The entire fact that technology is secluded from the other fields is tragic because technology is the driving force behind human development, if you like it or not. If technology is also a major “power” making borders disappear , which in fact it does, we should think more about it — in any field.
But disciplinary borders will probably be the last ones to be “transcended,” I guess.
Reflection Questions
1) Are there (national) borders that have disappeared in your lifetime? Which ones?
2) Do you think that human beings will give up thinking in binaries soon? Why/not?
3) Which role does technology play for changing human cognition according to your perspective?